Aladdin

Is there a single culture the animation department at Disney hasn’t white-washed for the masses? Among the over overpraised cartoons in the studio’s entire canon, Aladdin explores what happens when a street urchin simultaneously falls in love with a princess and incurs the wrath of the evil sorcerer trying to destroy her father’s kingdom. Jasmine is another “free-spirited” type in the Barbie-doll tradition, a faux feminist who wants everyone to know that she can do everything the boys can, even with such a big bosom. Though the film’s milieu is ostensibly an Arab enchanted city, there’s nothing particularly Middle Eastern about the whole thing outside of the sand (who knew loveable tigers were popular outside of India!). Having spent considerable quality time with Aladdin dodging police officers and fruit sellers at the local market, it’s amazing Jasmine can’t recognize Aladdin beneath the turban. Seriously, it’s not like the animators have made it difficult for her: Every Arab male in the film is shady and sniveling (hell, even the evil Jafar’s pet parrot gets his name from Shakespeare’s “darkest” play, Othello), whereas Aladdin looks like Scott Wolf and sounds like Clay Aiken. Disney knows how to sell lies, but Aladdin is ultimately less offensive than patently ridiculous, mostly because its ethnic white noise is really just an excuse for Robin Williams—as a postmodern blabbermouthed genie who grants Aladdin three wishes—to put on the most elaborate, narcissistic circus act in the history of cinema. The actor once said, “Cocaine is God’s way of saying you’re making too much money.” Aladdin is proof that he was right.

From our partners

Replying in 2013 to a comment to a comment from 2010 on a review from 2004 for a movie from 1992.

The Jasmine line is fine. Jasmine is a faux-feminist character because she's drawn in such a way to be a sexualized character, what with her breasts and various scantily clad outfits, male gaze, etc.

The tiger bit is not though. You thought it was improbable for an Arab princess to have a pet tiger, and Steaksauce provided an example of a type of tiger that is native to such locales. Oh well, small mistake, nothing to throw a fit over.

And I don't actually remember Aladdin very well, I haven't seen it since I was a child. From memory alone, I'd rank it above The Little Mermaid and Lion King, and below Beauty and the Beast, which I still like to this day.

Posted by Geologist on 2013-03-03 00:30:29

Oh, I totally get what you mean. The historical inaccuracy, the first Disney heroine to dare to be a feminist - my, it's almost as if this movie was made for little children!

Posted by Anonymous on 2012-12-03 06:56:03

One of the perils of adding a comment section to the site is that, in cases where I\'m actually the one approving the comments, I would feel compelled into trying to explain my rationale for saying things in reviews I no longer remember writing. A1steaksauce: I\'m not exactly sure what I meant by the tiger bit, especially the India part, but it appears that I\'m not talking about the mere existence of the tiger in the film so much as its loveability (or, lovability, to you). I think the Jasmine line speaks perfectly for itself. And as for \"loveable,\" it\'s a perfectly acceptable alternate spelling for the word you spell \"lovable.\" Will try harder for you next time. Promise.

Posted by Jonathan Keefe on 2010-05-27 06:35:30

\"Though the film\'s milieu is ostensibly an Arab enchanted city, there\'s nothing Middle Eastern about these characters beyond the sand (who knew loveable tigers were popular outside of India!).\" Apparently you\'ve never heard of the Caspian tiger? It\'s always the mark of a pseudo - intellectual when they communicate with an air of condescension and yet they make giant gaping mistakes. Also, you misspelled lovable. Then you criticize Jasmine as a \"faux - feminist\" yet then you say the reason she isn\'t is her \"big bosom?\" I\'m confused whether you feel the animators were being sexist in their depiction of the character or whether her characterization was not feminist in its depiction? In what way does her \"big bosom\" suggest otherwise? Good luck in your future reviews Ed, hopefully you can research before you launch campaigns against the presence of a tiger in an animated children\'s fantasy and make claims that their is underlying racism by the presence of villains who you feel are \"Arab\" while Aladdin apparently looks like Scott Wolf.

Posted by Anonymous on 2010-05-25 13:25:22

Ah, more proof that Disney doesn't care about accuracy. Historical or other. Why even take the time to "diss" them because they think a tiger looks good in their fantasy? To show people who respect your opinion that it wasn't lost on you? I know it's been years since you wrote this, but to me it looks like something *was* lost on you.

So I hope you and Eric know with these reviews, you were always speaking to the converted. And this is from someone who enthusiastically agrees with you on Lion King and Eric on Bambi. Despite my childhood resentment of this film due to several showings in school where the boys would parrot at least half of Williams' lines 2 seconds after he would say them (and sometimes Abu's), I like this film today. Disney's always been, for one reason or another, patently ridiculous. And, I think Will Ferrell has since this review more than proven that there have been worse comedy - star generated freakshows in cinema. And as for out - of - control cokeheads...if from '96 - 98 Nic Cage wasn't doing that, perhaps he should have been (maybe then he would be able to strike movie fans with a sense of profundity instead of being a constant joke). He was intolerable enough in Face/Off and Snake Eyes without it.